From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124])
 by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.7729.1687344068880064874
 for <devel@edk2.groups.io>;
 Wed, 21 Jun 2023 03:41:09 -0700
Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io;
 dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=JV9q0KYO;
 spf=pass (domain: redhat.com, ip: 170.10.129.124, mailfrom: kraxel@redhat.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com;
	s=mimecast20190719; t=1687344067;
	h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
	 to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=QNeFJE/ITAr/LcQS0L16p4lY0RlbyEz0ZxyUlDXap74=;
	b=JV9q0KYOSmiQbsSTvgLLPFoZdXG/e4Kj3tZw2rgKRIjJ7kWW9FeRRBES8SgrW/uYd2BnFG
	Xpy5HjRww+dsEWA3n66MDeiX1ogtbCE180R3OAPK5lEiWX7uyf3Mu1j5jpHLaBRffH8fFs
	3pbtDrr/xHNe5DHsQGB22ggCRRiECnc=
Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com
 [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS
 (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id
 us-mta-153-0wUCbyw_Og2x8UerW1y_hw-1; Wed, 21 Jun 2023 06:41:04 -0400
X-MC-Unique: 0wUCbyw_Og2x8UerW1y_hw-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.8])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E936E858290;
	Wed, 21 Jun 2023 10:41:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from sirius.home.kraxel.org (unknown [10.39.192.126])
	by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66A09C1ED97;
	Wed, 21 Jun 2023 10:41:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by sirius.home.kraxel.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id DC18D1800381; Wed, 21 Jun 2023 12:41:01 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 12:41:01 +0200
From: "Gerd Hoffmann" <kraxel@redhat.com>
To: devel@edk2.groups.io, ardb@kernel.org
Cc: Michael Kubacki <mikuback@linux.microsoft.com>, 
	Leif Lindholm <quic_llindhol@quicinc.com>, "Kinney, Michael D" <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [RFC PATCH] ArmPkg: Enable AuditMode for Uncrustify CI checks
Message-ID: <32rzrxqiqgc4li3hrhui2qvcg7caootlvphlwq5hnvtukhvl7y@szpomotvdcte>
References: <20230602085136.3552790-1-ardb@kernel.org>
 <e7c9ecfc-2af1-06f5-92c3-6052c5ab12fb@linux.microsoft.com>
 <CAMj1kXHuZOqNyOXaJnu5eJVg5xsSBcegh2RDFr_RVDuAak+7Uw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMj1kXHuZOqNyOXaJnu5eJVg5xsSBcegh2RDFr_RVDuAak+7Uw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.8
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

  Hi,

> > In AArch64Mmu.h, I agree that preserving the (mostly) global column as
> > opposed to block-specific columns would be easier to vertically scan. Is
> > that the main issue in the file?
> 
> Yes.

It is possible to exclude specific files from checks, see CryptoPkg for
example which does this for some files generated by openssl configure.

> I'm sure this all seems quite reasonable if you already bought into
> using uncrustify. But for a drive-by contributor, or someone like me
> who has been contributing code for many years based on the agreed
> coding style guidelines, I struggle to understand why uncrustify is a
> reasonable solution to the problem of inconsistent coding style.

I find it quite nice.  Yes, you have to invest the time to set things up
once.  But then you can just delegate all code formating to uncrustify
instead of doing it manually.

take care,
  Gerd